Monday, November 30, 2009

I keep hearing that the Islamic terrorists are but a minority of the peaceful religion of Islam. I keep saying the few Muslims that are peaceful are peaceful despite Islam, not because of it. Islam was created by Muhammad to be a political ideology masked as a religion. He created Islam for power, and his own narcissistic reasons.

The following video is a large collection of Muslims on their Pilgrimage to Mecca. Peaceful? NO. Minority? NO.

If the world was to fall under the rule of a global caliphate, every Muslim would be what the political correct folks call "radical."

A utility vehicle was parked near the pumps with Freedom Works, and a dittie about how socialism is taking over America, plastered all over his vehicle - and I just had to stop and say hi. Amazing, so many folks angry with the left in Southern California. Could it be because Americans cherish their liberty?

The New York Times proclaimed proudly how wonderful it is that we have a food stamp program in America. As food stamp usage soars to record numbers, the Times proudly proclaimed, "a program once scorned as a failed welfare scheme now helps feed one in eight Americans and one in four children."

The Leftists of the New York Times don't seem to get it. The increased use of the food stamp program is not something that should be celebrated, but something that should raise concern. While they are excited that more people are joining the culture of dependency upon the government, as if an increase in slavery to the federal government is a good thing, the increased number of people using food stamps tells me that Obama is further destroying the economy, and that the leftists are getting what they desire: The eventual complete transformation of America into a welfare state from sea to shining sea.

Charities are suffering, and welfare is increasing. It's a liberal wet dream, and evidence that the destruction of the economy, and the expansion of the welfare state, is by design. They claim they are trying to fix the old problem of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, but that is exactly what the Democrats are causing. More Americans are joining the food stamp lines, and more politicians are lining their pockets.

Hope and Change is exactly what Obama promised: he hoped to change America into the new Soviet Socialist Republic.

I still don't get the New York Times. How can they be proud that food stamp usage is on the rise?

Fearing that Islamic Sharia Law could follow if the Islamization of Switzerland is not stopped, the Swiss voters voted to ban minarets on mosques. The government opposes the ban, fearing the ban will provoke Muslim reaction in the form of extremism, a boycott by wealthy Muslims, or protests.

Muslims are about 5% of Switzerland's population, a number that has more than doubled since the 1990s, and the people of Switzerland wish to stop the introduction of Islamic culture before it becomes too late.

Months after a coup that ousted the president, and went against the nation's Constitution, Honduras looks like it will elect the conservative opposition candidate, Porfirio Lobo, as president of the small, Central American country.

The preliminary results currently have Lobo holding 56& of the vote, compared to 38% by opposition Elvin Santos.

United States officials are defending the election, while leftist governments in the region are alleging that the election "whitewashes" the June coup.

Not fond of the political fat-cats, Hondurans still decided to vote because they want to end the crisis that has hurt their ecoomy.

By Douglas V. GibbsAmong Biblical Scholars, "Magog" (given extensive attention in the Book of Ezekiel) has long thought to have been Russia due to the combination of the geographical reference that indicates this military power of the end-times to be due north, and the belief that Russia is derived from "Rosh", which is referenced specifically in Ezekiel Chapter 38. In fact, these scholars are convinced that there can be no doubt that the "Gog" of Ezekiel 38 represents the person in control of the affairs of Russia and is the leader of the forces that will invade Israel during the culmination of the birth pains that leads to the Great Tribulation.

These same scholars also have determined that the Empire that will rise again out of the ashes of that war, and be the empirical seat of the anti-Christ, will be a new Roman Empire, rising from the ashes of the old Roman Empire. Specifically, they believe this great empire the anti-Christ will rise out of is a unified Europe, or a global government directed by an organization like the United Nations.

In fact, it is becoming alarmingly clear in today's political scheme that there are forces working towards a one-world government, guided by liberal principles, and masked by the claim it desires peace, unity and equity among the peoples of the world.

Problem is, a close scrutiny of the Bible does not reveal Russia to be Magog, or the great empire to be centered in Europe. As the world shapes into a new order, the truth of the prophecies are becoming glaringly clear to some, and contradictory to the long held thoughts of prophecy held by the leading minds of Christian apologetics.

Europe and Russia have been forced into the roles they hold in end-times prophecy because they have been the major players on the world stage. Since Christians have been sure the Rapture is just around the corner for the last hundred years, then surely (they have reasoned) the current world stage is what the Bible refers to when it speaks of armies invading Israel, and an empire rising to create a global governance system. Problem is, the Bible is not a Western book, and the players so carefully described in biblical text are not Western in nature, either. The Holy Bible is a Middle Eastern book with Middle Eastern players. Careful study makes the facts glaringly obvious, especially now that the world stage is altering in the direction of what biblical text predicted.

The Bible, when it comes to prophecy, is very different than celebrated "oracles" like Nostradamis, or various other soothsayers. Rather than depend on general prophecy in the hopes it is close enough to be considered truth, and then only accurate a third of the time, Biblical prophecy is very specific and carries a 100% record of accuracy. The prophecies of Christ's birth, life, and death, for example, pinpointed his place of birth (Bethleham, Micah 5:1-2), He would be born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14), Jesus would come from the Tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10), He would be a descendant of David (Jeremiah 23:5), He would be preceded by a messenger who turned out to be John the Baptist (Isaiah 40:1-5,9), He would be God in the form of man and would perform miracles (Isaiah 35:4-6), Christ would enter Jerusalem on the back of a donkey (Zechariah 9:9), His Ministry would be centered in Galilee (Isaiah 9:1), Jesus Christ would speak in parables (Psalm 78:1-2), Jesus would be betrayed by a friend (Psalm 41:9) for thirty pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12-13), He would be spat upon and beaten (Isaiah 50:6, Psalm 22:16-17, Isaiah 52:14), He would remain silent and not protest the accusations (Isaiah 53:7), the Messiah would be crucified and pierced (Zechariah 12:10), None of His bones would be broken (Psalm 34:20), People would cast lots for His clothing (Psalm 28:12), He would pray for his executioners (Isaiah 53:12), He would be executed with criminals (Isaiah 53:12), The Messiah Would Be Buried In A Rich Man’s Tomb (Isaiah 53:9), .

In fact, that is only some of the prophecies. Note how specific they are, and how they were fulfilled exactly as foreseen. So if the Bible is so specific in prophecy, then why are we scrambling with trying to force prophecy of the end-times into our current political situation?

Sometimes, though specific, the nature of a prophecy is not clear until it is upon us. A great example of that is Daniel 12:4 "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."

Many argue that Daniel's prophecy is speaking about a great increase in information technology in the end-times. Others would argue that the scroll of scripture was unrolled on tables, and stretched clear accross the room. In order to compare scriptures, a person had to "run to and fro", therefore, using that line of thinking, the verse in the Book of Daniel may be referring to an increased understanding of scripture.

With the advent of the Internet, of which no scholar could forsee, both are true due to the increase of all information available to everyone.

Sometimes time helps clarify what is coming.

When the Iran hostage crisis erupted in 1979, we were reminded that Islam's beef is not only with Israel. On September 11, 2001 their war against infidels hit home. With the recent rise in Islamic populations, and their brazen attempt to ressurect the Ottoman Empire, it becomes apparent that the world as we see it today may be something drastically different in the days to come. Considering these world events, how can biblical scholars defend their Western view of biblical prophecy when not only world events, but a careful study of scripture, proves them wrong?

The world decribed biblically that will exist in the period of birth pains that approaches the Rapture is forming right now before our eyes, and the reality of it is something that should have been noticed long ago, for the puzzle pieces began to fall into place long before now.

When trying to determine whether or not we are in the phase that will lead to the biblical Great Tribulation, obvious signs are everywhere. But are these signs an indication we are in the end-times? Or are they simply events that would occur anyhow. After all, many of the conditions that would be considered signs we are in the final days were in existence during the time period that led to World War II, as well. And during that time period Christians were convinced they were in the end-times, too.

During the 1930s and 1940s there were many false prophets and christs, of which Hitler could be named among them. The misleading words of false messiahs was foretold in Matthew 24:5 and Matthew 24:11. Then, as is now, there were Wars and Rumors of Wars (Matthew 24:6-7), Famines, Earthquakes and Tribulations (Matthew 24:7-9).

The similarities stop there. Now, more in tune with this age, prophecies indicated that the Gospel would be preached throughout the world (Matthew 24:14), while Godlessness and Apostacy (Falling Away From Faith) would reign (II Timothy 3:1-5,7 and I Timothy 4:1-3). There would be the existence of a 200-million man army in the east (Revelation 9:16) of which both China, and the Islamic Jihad can boast right now (and note that when that was written the number seemed astronomical to those folks because at the time the entire population of the world was about 170 million).

So, the table is set, one could say. But what about the military players? What about Magog and the armies of the anti-Christ? Where will they come from if Magog is not Russia as argued at the beginning of this piece?

The classic Western Christian belief in end-time prophecy says that the Anti-Christ will come to power, promising peace and trying to unite the world. Now, there is nothing wrong with peace, and global unity, except that the Anti-Christ is the great deceiver, and when his true goals are exposed, he will be exposed for what he really is. This will result in a great war. The four horsemen of the apocolypse will ride, the white horse representing the Anti-Christ, the red horse representing war, a black horse representing famine, and a pale horse representing death. End-time scholars state that the unfolding of Revelation will begin with the Antichrist being opposed by three rulers of the south, during which millions will be killed. It will be a short war because of nuclear weaponry, and will be followed by inflation and famine. The rich will get richer, and the poor will starve to death. More millions will then die. The short, killer famine will be followed by a plague that will sweep the entire world. By the time the "fifth seal" is opened, a quarter of the world's population will be dead. 144,000 Jewish witnesses that come to Christ after The Rapture will try to evangelize the world for Christ, and millions of the converts will be martyred by the world leader, and the harlot, which is the name for the one world religion that will be in existence. God's wrath will be poured upon the Earth for the killing of his people, after that, and a worldwide earthquake will occur. The quake will be so bad that people will cry out for rocks to fall on them to put them out of their misery. Then, it gets worse.

Much of that Western interpretation of the end-time prophecies seems in line, or close to what the Bible states. But the Western version of end-times prophecy leaves a lot of questions. Why would three nations from the south move against the Anti-Christ's empire? Why would the new Christians be so readily martyred? What religion is the world religion that denies Christ, and serves as the Anti-Christ's harlot?

The Anti-Christ's empirical realm will be centered in the Middle East. Isaiah 14:25 calls the Anti-Christ the "King of Babylon." He is also referred to, in the Bible, as the Assyrian, Prince of Tyre, and the Pharoah of Egypt. Considering these titles, it seems silly to assume, as many end-times scholars do, that the Anti-Christ would come out of Europe. As the Assyrian, the Anti-Christ will come from the regions of ancient Assyria, which today encompasses an area of several modern Muslim nations. As the King of Tyre, the Anti-Christ will rule over Lebanon, the stronghold of Hezbollah. As the King of Babylon he will rule over Iraq, Iran, and the Arabian Peninsula. As the Pharaoh of Egypt, he will rule over Egypt. Notice, these are all Muslim controlled areas. Considering biblical text, then, it would be reasonable to assume that the Anti-Christ will come out of the Islamic World.

Note that the Islamic Mahdi, prophecied by the Muslims, carries the same characteristics as the Christian Anti-Christ.

Knowing that the Muslim World will be the Anti-Christ's empire, which may include many more nations than it currently carries, it is then easy to consider why the new Christians among the Jewish People will be martyred, and who the world religion that hates Christ is.

In clarification, much of the book of Isaiah is devoted to naming the nations of the Anti-Christ that will clash with the Messiah at Armageddon. Babylon (Iraq and Arabia) in Isaiah 13 and 21, Assyria and the Philistines (Palestinians) in Isaiah 14, Moab (Jordan) in Isaiah 15, Damascus in Isaiah 17, Cush (Sudan and Somaliland) in Isaiah 18, Egypt in Isaiah 19, Cush and Egypt in Isaiah 20, Edom (Arabia) in Isaiah 21, Tyre (Lebanon) in Isaiah 23 - for example.

But what about Magog, which is believed by many to be Russia; where does Magog come into the picture?

Is it possible that since all of the nations moving against Israel and the Messiah in Ezekiel and Isaiah are Muslim, that Magog is a Muslim nation as well? The argument that "Rosh", mentioned in Ezekiel, is Russia falls flat. The word Rosh means "head," or "chief prince." Therefore, Rosh is not a place, but a person. The fact that Rosh of Magog is accompanied by Meshech and Tubal, which are regions in, and around Turkey, leads one to believe that the region due north of Israel is not Russia, but the Turkish Penninsula.

A more specific understanding may come from recognizing that during Ezekiel's day, Magog was located in Asia Minor. Even Western scholars recognize that Magog is the land of the Scythians, who came later to inhabit Russia later in history. But, going back to when Ezekiel wrote his Old Testament book, the Scythian territory was the land mass in the southern region of the former USSR. This would place Magog among not only Turkey, but the Muslim states that split from Russia when communism fell. More specifically, Ancient Scythia includes Turkey, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and the other Muslim states in the immediate area.

Recognizing this, one must assume that Turkey will abandon its secular nature, and move in the direction of becoming a radical Islamic State, of which has already begun.

So, as a political writer, I am keeping a close eye on Turkey, and will be expecting an Islamic Revolution to erupt in that region sometime soon. Very soon the Islamic Caliphate will begin to take shape from Turkey down to Yemen, all points between, and many regions beyond.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

For more information:

Read God's War on Terror by Walid Shoebat, and The Islamic AntiChrist by Joel Richardson

Sunday, November 29, 2009

When disaster strikes, the United States is the leading country in providing aid to the victims. But, what the world doesn't see is the frequent tragic withholding of aid to minority religious groups in tragedy torn regions that are dominated by Muslims.

Christian Freedom International urges governments like Indonesia, when tragedies like earthquakes and tsunamis strike, to assist all victims of their region. However, Islamic Nations have a track record of withholding aid from minority religious groups like Christians. Even when aid pours in from predominently Judeo-Christian nations, Muslim leaders give that aid to their own, and let the rest fend for themselves in a gross miscarriage of justice and blatant double standard.

Christian Freedom International has come to the aid of thousands of Christians because they were denied help from their own government.

When the earthquake recently struck Indonesia, thousands were trapped under the rubble near the earthquake center in the city of Padang. With all communications cut, Christian Freedom International ensured aid reached the city with a vibrant minority Christian community.

It is Christian Freedom International's hope that religious differences will not get in the way of them helping all of those in true need from natural disasters afflicting those regions.

Tonight, Craig McDonald of Christian Freedom International joins us on the Political Pistachio Radio Revolution to discuss the reality of the difficulty to get aid into these areas, and what you can do to help Christian Freedom International continue to get aid into tragedy-stricken areas.

After a lengthy discussion about "Climategate," the issue of globalism, and the current political establishment, came up on my radio show. During the discussion a troll decided to come out from under his bridge and try to hijack the Political Pistachio Radio Revolution. The troll of the same kind called back in later in the show and disguised his voice as another (I believe). He was worse than your typical liberal leftist troll because he was conservative, or so he claimed, that had bought into the same Bush Derangement Syndrome the left had fallen spell under. Most likely a Ron Paul supporter, this Los Angeles brain-twist had decided the Republican Party had become no different than the Democrats, and therefore did not deserve the support of conservatives at all.

He asked, "Are you a member of the Republican Party?"

I indicated, "I am registered with the Republican Party, but I am a Christian Conservative first."

He then asked, "Why are you a member of the Republican Party?"

"I originally registered to vote for Ronald Reagan. The Republican Party, more often than the Democrat Party, follows my line of thinking. That doesn't mean they always do, and I am aware that the Republican leadership right now has been infiltrated by progressives. So, right now a lot of conservatives don't want to call themselves Republican because the Republican Party has shown itself to be just another part of the political cesspool that is Washington DC. I'm a believer, and this is me personally, and I am not going to get into a big debate about it, I believe that the way the system is set up the money is in the parties, so a third-party candidate cannot win on a national level. That does not mean that independents cannot win, or shouldn't win, at a smaller level, such as what happened in New York 23 where a Conservative Party candidate, Doug Hoffman, actually made a darn good run for representative. And I was excited about it, and I was definitely in Doug Hoffman's corner and not the Republicans, because the Republican was, despite the 'R' after her name, Scozzafava was in every sense of the word a liberal. When it comes to liberalism, or the belief in big government, I just can't vote for that, I can't be a part of that because along with being a conservative, and a Christian, I also consider myself a Constitutional Originalist. In fact, the show I co-host prior to Political Pistachio on Saturday nights, Founding Truth, is all about the U.S. Constitution. Next question?"

The caller responded, "I don't want to misquote you, but you say the Republican Party is closer to what you believe than the Democrats. . ."

I interceded, "More often than not, yes. The principles that founded the party's, well, I shouldn't say 'founded,' but the principles that guided the party when I came to voting age was Reagan Conservatism, and I was fully on board with that at the time. As I have grown older I have watched the party head left. I'm not going to abandon the party, I believe it is salvageable. I believe it can be saved. A lot of conservatives disagree with me on this. A lot of conservatives would rather let the Republican Party go the way of the Whigs and create a new party; but all of the money that is necessary to get a candidate in place is in the parties. That's where the ability to raise the money is, unfortunately, and a third party candidate on a national level just cannot compete. It is as simple as that."

"Yeah, I know," said the caller. "What I was getting to is they have had power for what, six years? I don't think they were that conservative, they were much the same as the Democratic Party in my opinion. What I don't get is how many years have to go by before Americans become independent and stop supporting either party."

"But you are not going to get enough people to do that," I said.

Bob Rinear, the guest, after I asked his opinion, stated: "My feelings are normally obnoxious to people because I view both parties as being from the same mold. I equate it to football. You've got an NFL, and inside the NFL you have an AFC and an NFC. These guys might have different passing, and these guys might have different defenses. But guess what? They both march to the NFL. The NFL is the boss of both of those parties, so to speak. Look at the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, they're the same exact thing. They are both government working for the elitists. Now sure, you get the occasional guy that's a little bit better than the next guy, a little bit closer to what the Constitution might have said once, but, uh, for the most part, no. And frankly, the man just asked how long do we have to go before we are independent, et cetera, et cetera. The only way, and Doug mentioned it a few minutes ago when he was talking about the New York election, the only way to get rid of the standard, old boy, network, starts at the local level. You start with people at a local - even really local, I am not even talking about your governor, or county - and you guys know if you pay attention to what goes on in your own county, or your hometown, and you say, 'You know what, this guy over here would be really good working for my county.' And then if he does really good, it's a guy you might want to send to the state, and replace the idiot that might be there. And once he gets to that state, he might make a good representative, someday. That's how it has to happen, at the grass roots level, absolutely."

I then said, "Like I was saying earlier, when it comes to the national level you're just not going to get an independent in there. I mean, there's been a couple attempts, but it winds up putting a split in the vote. Whether we like it or not, the reality is that we have the two major parties. But, like I said, I don't vote party-line. I vote for the guy, and it seems almost every time it turns out the guy, or the gal, turns out to be a Republican. There's been a couple times I have voted independent, in certain elections - local elections, and so forth. And I am a firm believer that with the dissatisfaction with the GOP, and the anger against the Democratic Party, that in 2010 we are going to see more independents, or at least non-major-party candidates, win. I think we are going to see more wins for those other parties than ever before. I think that's a strong possibility, unless the Republican Party gets their heads out of their butts and turns back towards the Reagan-conservative level. The problem is the Republican leadership, and many of the people in the Republican Party, are as Bob just said: a part of the cesspool. They have the cesspool of Washington, and the cesspool of government, running through their veins. They are more concerned about re-election, or getting their agendas across, or gaining more power through bigger government, than they are about what's best for this nation, or adhering to the U.S. Constitution."

Caller: "So do you plan on becoming an independent then? Are you planning on not being registered as a Republican, and being an independent?"

I replied, "I am going to keep my registration as a Republican because of the parties that is the one that I still most closely identify with, and I still believe there is still hope to salvage the party. I am not going to abandon the party. I don't believe the party needs to be abandoned. I believe it needs to be returned to where it should be. . . the Republican Party is still my team. I am not going to abandon them for doing something stupid. The moment they do something stupid I don't just walk away [and throw my hands up]. I will stick to it, and keep pushing, and keep writing letters, and keep voting for who I think are the right candidates, and I keep speaking out. Eventually, if they keep heading in the direction they are headed I am going to have to give up, [but I believe it can be turned around and it won't come to that].

Caller: "How long are you going to give them?"

"I don't know," I honestly responded. "There is still hope there. I still see the Tom McClintocks, and the Michelle Bachmans, and the. . ."

Caller: "Using a team analogy, do you know why the L.A. Clippers suck every year? They keep sucking because people keep supporting them. . . I understand what you are saying, you don't abandon your team after one mistake, or two mistakes, or one year, or two years, but you keep going back and forth, 'vote Republican,' and they let you down. 'Vote Democrat,' and they let you down. 'Vote Republican,' and 'vote Democrat,' 'Republican.'"

I asked, "So how do you convince everyone to abandon. . . "

Caller: "I'll tell you. Number one, you tell them that all you people who complain about parties in general, how do you expect them to stay on their toes when people keep supporting them?"

I inserted, "You know, I've heard this argument over and over and over and over and over again, but here's the problem: You're not up against just parties. It's more than that. There is an establishment that is much larger than that. And we don't have the money outside those parties. We don't have the strength outside those parties to put up any candidates that are going to challenge the parties right now. That's the reason we have to start at the grass roots level. It is not something you just suddenly create. It is something that grows from the bottom. The Whig Party didn't just vanish over night. It took time. It took time for the Republican Party . . . "

Caller: "I understand all that, but think of it like this: if you take both parties, think of them as, uh, how about this, both parties spend money. Both of them build up government. Both of them didn't shut down the borders. And I can go on and on and on and on. But in the end you are saying, 'Yeah, they are both bad, but I have more faith in the Republican Party . . ."

I said, "I've got a question for you, then. If they are exactly the same, if they are basically the same thing, and there's no difference, then why hasn't the health care bill passed? Why didn't the Republicans just vote for it if there is no difference between the two parties?"

Caller: "Because there are people like you that won't abandon the party."

"That's not my question," I said. "You didn't. . . if they are no different from the Democratic Party, then why didn't they just vote for the health care bill?"

Caller: "Because not everyone believes they are what I am saying. They still believe there is a difference, like you."

"There is a difference," I said with a heightened voice. "Otherwise, they would have just voted for the health care bill as well. And they wouldn't have fought against Cap and Trade."

Caller: "So there's a difference. . ."

Me: "There's obviously a difference! There's obviously a difference! Obviously the Republican Party is right of center. There are problems in the party. There are. . ."

Caller: "The Republican Party is right of center?"

Me: "Absolutely."

Caller: "Would you like me to go down the list of all the non-conservative . . . "

Me: "You know what? Hang on a second, Mr. L.A., go ahead, Bob."

Bob Rinear: "I am listening to this, and I am enjoying it. It's classic. I just said a minute ago that there's no difference between the parties. Let me clarify that a little bit. . . What they need to do, beyond anything else, is stay a politician. Now, the Republicans have a history of being to the right, not going along with most of the socialist programs, this, that, and the other. Right now that is the proper thing to say to stay elected. That works, okay? So, he stands up and says no to Cap and Trade, says no to health care, with a whole lot of Republican rah-rahs saying 'yeah, baby,' 'yeah, baby.' The same Republican may be all for marching through Afghanistan for the next forty years doing nothing but spendin' money and killin' people. He might have his own pet agenda that still ends up being in the hands of the bankers, and the military industrial complex, et cetera, et cetera. Okay? So what they present to people as their platform to get elected - right now the hot bet is to say no to all this crap. No more spending, no more bail outs, no more cap and trade, no more health care - the guy that stands up and says all that is a prime candidate, and he's probably going to be a Republican, and people are going to say, 'That's my man!'. Now, what's he doing behind closed doors? Is he voting for, let's say, Afghanistan? More senseless wars across this globe? No other reason to enrich the Pentagon People? Probably. Is he all about whatever little pet projects he's got for his little hometown? Probably. Okay? So they still march to the same money backers. It's just right now when you are looking at issues, who do you want to have in power to head off the most egregious of them, and yeah, you gotta look at the Republican guys standing up against the really big hit agendas. That's how this has to work. Like you just said, if they were all tied at the hip on every agenda, health care would have passed unanimous, by all 545 of them, and it'd be done - bing, bang the gavel, and it's all over. But no, there is still enough phone calls from people saying if you vote for that you're out a job next year. Plenty won't vote for that one. He's gonna go along and look like the Grand Ol' Party, and say 'Yes, I'm standing on principle.' But you can bet, and I'll bet you any amount dollar-wise we'd like to wager, that he's got something else you are awfully against, that he's all for someplace else. And now with the political parties that's how it works. That's how the game works. So, are they built from the same mold? I will still stand on it, my friends, that for the most part, there's still an agenda, and it's money, and it's control. It just might happen to vary where those particular monies and controls are."

"And right after the break I'm going to ask Bob his opinion of Sarah Palin, because I believe she is the antithesis of what you just described, Bob. That's why she is so popular. . ."

Later in the program I give more of my opinion on Sarah Palin, Bob Rinear hands me his opinion, and another troll, possibly the same person, calls in, and then the discussion gets really heated.

We also address the Ron Paul factor, and one of my other listeners calls in to put into perspective why the Republican Party is worth saving, and how much it is unlike the party of the Democrats.

The Emails and other files made public after the hacking last week of a computer server used by the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit has become the source of the biggest scandal in the history of modern science by exposing man-made global warming as not only being a lie, but a well designed leftist deception with a money trail attached. What is even more revealing is the fact that Obama's Science Czar is one of the players caught with their liar's cap on. Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Dr. John P. Holdren, is reported as being an "intractable global warming activist with no time for climate change skepticism." Well, it turns out that the former Harvard professor and Al Gore global warming adviser features prominently in the thousands of e-mails hacked out of England's East Anglia CRU.

According to the Canada Free Press and NewMax, the most embarrassing item for the Obama Administration may be a 2003 exchange between Holdren and TCSDaily.com editor-in-chief Nick Schulz. Schulz challenged Holdren on whether downplaying the significance of the Medieval Warm Period required "what lawyers call the burden of proof."

Newsmax writes that "Holdren's retort contained a remarkable assertion coming from a scientist: 'In practice, burden of proof is an evolving thing – it evolves as the amount of evidence relevant to a particular proposition grows.'"

In other words, political motivation is a large part of how the burden of proof evolves.

NewsMax continues by indicating that the CRU Emails and files also find Holdren disparaging solar physicists Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, contrarians regarding surface temperatures over the past millennium, who were colleagues of Holdren at Harvard. Speculation asks if Holdren may have intimidated the two scientists before they "suddenly and politely withdrew from the fray."

Yet, with this mountain of damning evidence, Holdren remains Science Czar, and Obama is still going to Copenhagen for his Climate Change conference.

The Left is amazing. Even faced with insurmountable evidence that their deceptive agenda has been caught red-handed, they continue on to force upon the people liberty-killing legislation and treaties.

Climategate, and the Leftists ignoring it, is a true indication that the facts mean nothing to the Left. Their socialist agenda is more important to them than the truth.

Saturday, November 28, 2009

According to the New York Times, the Blue Fin Tuna is in a death spiral. Perhaps. I don't know enough about Atlantic Tuna to make a determination. The Yellow Fin Tuna is more to my familiarity since the family has such a close connection to it. I've heard the stories of how my uncle Gil and his father Frank were the first to commercially pack tuna. They began a company named the Van Camp Seafood Company, based out of San Diego, and named their product "Chicken of the Sea." The Van Camps enjoyed a merger with Ralston-Purina in 1963, which is where the money was really made.

Visiting Uncle Gil and Aunt Alice as a kid was always a treat. They were the ones that exposed me to the arts, exquisite cuisine, and reading. My aunt bought me hundreds of dollars worth of books every Christmas, usually with a theme. One year all of the books might be about horses. Another year, the books were all mysteries. Once the collection of books was nothing but Science Fiction, from H.G. Wells to Isaac Asimov. Nonetheless, Gil and Alice did what they could to ensure I was well educated, and exposed to the things they felt I ought to be.

Interestingly, I never got the feeling from any of my family that wealth meant elitism, or a stuffy attitude. My Uncle Stan, once, picked me up to take me to the piers for a hamburger, and we chatted away about baseball cards and bicycles.

I when my Uncle Gil took my family out to a snazzy French restaurant, and my little brother, after studying the menu carefully, announced he desired a burrito. Gil obliged, vanishing for a while, and returning with a burrito for the little boy.

As a child I also heard a lot of tales about the tuna fishing, and what it was like in the old days. Gil was concerned with the environmentalists crying about the diminishing population of Yellow Tail, even though he knew, he would say, that the environmentalists were all full of crap.

That is the statement that comes to mind as I read the New York Times proclamation that Blue Fin is on death's door. One wonders, as is all of the other environmental claims, if the announcement of Tuna's death spiral is true, or just a load of bull with a trail of money attached.

I suppose when the tuna boat comes in with no catch, there will be concern, but I don't believe it will ever get to something like that. I just wonder, with the advent of Climategate, if the leftists are lying about the Tuna, or if there really is need for alarm.

Listening to my uncle, I would say it is probably a false alarm, just like the false hysteria about man-made global warming.

Women who support their so-called right to have an abortion indicate that it is their body, and nobody, especially the father of the child, has any right to tell her what she can and can't do. The father, when it comes to the choice of ending the life of his child, is a second-class citizen who has no say on the issue of whether or not his child lives or dies. Yet, these same women, should they decide to keep the child, and leave the man, are the first to demand he pay child support.

With the advent of DNA testing, however, more evidence of the moral decline of our nation is being unveiled, and it is official: Many women in the United States have no shame, having hidden their adultery, and the true identity of the fathers of their children.

A stunning article titled "Who Knew I Was Not the Father?" appeared in the New York Times on November 17, explaining how DNA testing is changing fatherhood. The piece featured a number of heart-wrenching cases where the father of a child found out through DNA testing that he was not the biological parent.

In many cases these men, after finding out about their wife's infidelity, paid child-support for children they didn't even father.

The real painful part of it all is that often these men, despite the betrayal, still see these children as theirs. They love them as their own.

What have we come to as a nation when children are nothing more than a throw-away item, and adultery is treated as if it is nothing more than a little white lie?

The truth is not something the Democrat-led U.S. Government likes to reveal to the American People. Obama promised transparency, and his administration is one lie after another. Americans are being economically driven into the ground, and the Democrats are proclaiming the recession is over.

The leftists have done the same with Climate Change, taking drastic steps toward increasing the cost of energy, and moving toward an international agreement on the environment, when man-made Global Warming was just recently confirmed to be a giant, politically motivated, hoax - just as the conservatives have been saying all along.

The media refuses to cover the facts, and borders on something that can only be reasoned as being delusional.

By Douglas V. GibbsChristians observe Communion many times throughout their lives. Communion is a holy time of worship in which the body of a church comes together to remember and celebrate what Jesus Christ did for us in his life, death, and resurrection. The observance is in obedience to Christ's command (1 Corinthians 11:24 "Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me."

When observing Communion, it is important that as a Christian we examine ourselves (1 Corinthians 11:28), for observing Communion is a statement of faith (1 Corinthians 11:26). In Communion we are proclaiming that His life is our life by partaking of the bread and wine, but understanding that they are unchanged elements, used as symbols, representing Christ's body and blood, in remembrance of his enduring sacrifice.

There are some variations based on tradition or preferences of a religion. In the Catholic Church, for example, rather than taking the element of bread and eating it yourself, the priest places the element on the tongue of the parishioner. Some Catholics, and Orthodox Christians, also believe that when the bread and wine is consumed it becomes the actual body and blood of Christ. The Catholic term for this is Transubstantiation. Transubstantiation is not Scripturally supported, so I am not one to accept that as biblical truth, but such a disagreement in doctrine is not the point of this article.

Patrick J. Kennedy has been barred from partaking in Communion at his Catholic Parish.

Regarding the situation, Kennedy explained, "The bishop instructed me not to take Communion and said that he has instructed the diocesan priests not to give me Communion."

The penalty for not being able to participate in Communion, according to Kennedy, was explained to him as being the result of Kennedy being ". . . not a good practicing Catholic because of the positions taken as a public official." The position in particular that has the Catholic Church denying Kennedy's participation in Communion is his position as a pro-abortion politician.

On the surface, as a pro-life individual that believes abortion in America is our version of genocide, it is easy to thank The Church for their wisdom. It is obvious that Patrick Kennedy is not right with God if he is willing to support the senseless murder of innocent babies. He is not someone who should probably be observing the sacrament of Communion.

However, my feelings on this matter, regardless of Kennedy's stance on abortion, steer toward the authority of The Church over an individual's decision like this. In other words, I am asking if a representative of the church should have this kind of power over a personal decision? Should the mortal men that serve The Church be able to punish a parishioner by disallowing him from participating?

My intention here is not to challenge the Catholic belief system of my many Catholic readers. Your belief belongs to you. But that is the point, isn't it? If your faith is a personal decision that belongs to you, then how is it that men can make a decision regarding your personal relationship with God by granting, or taking away, the allowance to observe a sacrament? As wrong as Patrick Kennedy is for being an abortionist, shouldn't his own conscience make the decision on whether or not he participates in Communion? And if he shouldn't participate, and then decides to do so anyway, then shouldn't that also be between him and God?

God gave us free will, meaning that we have the choice to accept Him, or deny Him. But that, and how we practice our faith, is a personal matter, isn't it? Why should church leaders have any say over whether or not we participate in the sacraments of our faith?

By Douglas V. GibbsMan-made Global Warming is a hoax. When the Earth stopped warming, without the environmentalist wackos realizing it, the Global Warming Hysteria-makers changed the name of it to Climate Change so that they could manage the hoax irregardless of what the temperatures did. When it was discovered the Antarctic ice shelves were expanding, they ignored it an began to concentrate on polar bears. When it was indicated that the polar bear population is increasing, they denied the truth of matter, and proclaimed it was a lie. When Gore's model was discovered to be wrong, and that a rise in Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere did not happen before the rise in temperature, but the other way around, they denied the facts. When Global Warming deniers in the scientific community spoke out against the environmental hysteria, they called those scientists liars, and ultimately labeled them as "not real scientists." After all, how could there be a consensus with so many scientists calling the Global Warming supporters a bunch of politically motivated liars?

Then came the leaked Emails that exposed the junk science of man-made Global Warming for what it is - A Great Big Politically Driven Lie!

Computer hackers obtained 160 megabytes of Emails from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in England. The Emails contained communication between many of the scientific researchers and policy advocates who in the Emails brazenly discussed destroying and hiding data that did not support their man-made global warming claims.

Professor Phil Jones, head of the CRU, and professor Michael E. Mann at Pennsylvania State University (an important player in the climate change debate), had a number of Emails between them come under special scrutiny. In their Emails the word "trick" was used, for example, when referring to adding in the real temps to each series and to hide the decline in temperature. The scientists responded saying that the word "trick" was used to describe a way to solve a problem, not something secret, and the Climate Change faithful bought the explanation.

Other Emails among these men included, regarding requests for Freedom of Information Act data, that they would delete a file rather than send it to anyone, or hide behind other legislation to ensure they can keep their files from reaching the public. Other "dubious" tricks of the trade were also discussed to hide the truth.

Global Warming science is "fudged science," and the wannabe scientists are too entrenched in their liberal agendas to reveal the truth.

It has also been leaked, as the scandal grows, that in addition to the New York Times ignoring the greatest scandal in modern science, the BBC also did, refusing to cover the story a month ago when they were sent the files.

Despite the scandal, and the fact that about a third of America believes in the tainted science of Climate Change (according to Rasmussen Reports), the trip to Copenhagen to discuss the details of creating a world government with direct power over financial and trading markets in an attempt to "deal with the crisis" is moving ahead. The next question, then, should be, "Why?"

A global economy, and a one world government, cannot come into being until the United States is willing to come on board. The American People would never allow the loss of American sovereignty unless the United States' economy collapse, and our industrial complex, was destroyed. This is why the Obama administration is proposing policies, in the guise of saving the planet from the ravages of Climate Change, to make it too expensive to manufacture products in the United States. The Affordable Energy Act of 2009 (Cap and Trade) will raise the cost of energy, forcing industrial production to go to other countries, and then ship the products back to America, further exacerbating the advantage China and India currently has when it comes to a significant cost advantage over American producers.

The liberal left won't cover the story, they ignore the significance of the Climategate Scandal, and the leftists are denying it to the very end.

I suppose it would be like finding out you were adopted, and your adopted parents only took you in because you had a fortune in the bank, of which they were planning on tossing you aside once they got their hands on the money. I suppose with that kind of pain, denial is easy.

Nonetheless, and I am addressing this to the Climate Change addicts that are reading this article, "your science is not only wrong, but a politically motivated lie - and you fell for it. Now, quit denying the truth, and own up to it. If you don't, and the Obama Administration continues full speed ahead, it could result in America's demise."

The survival of this nation depends on you, the Global Warming hysteria believers, in admitting you were wrong.

My son is 24. He told my a while ago that all of his friends that voted for Barack Obama are now saying, "I can't believe I voted for that guy."

Liberalism cannot win in the arena of ideas, and that is why it tries to masquerade itself as something else. That is why Obama lied so much during his campaign for president. Now, the true face of socialism is rearing upward, and the people don't like what they see, nor do they believe the lies anymore.

One of the bragging points of the left has been that they had the younger crowd. Fact is, "had" is the key word. Past tense. The youth of America are realizing the dangerous policies of the left, and are rejecting the Congressional Democrats and Barack Obama.

The rejection of the leftists by Young America is most evident in their feelings about the Democrat's health care legislation. In the beginning the younger voters were the strongest supporters of the Democrat's socialist healthcare initiative. A look at polls focused on young people in Arkansas, North Dakota and Maine, however, shows that the trend is changing, and the young people of America are turning away from the Democrats.

From DickMorris.com the following poll shows that

Under 30 = 25% Support & 65% Oppose

30-49 = 28% Support & 60% Oppose

50-64 = 41% Support & 50% Oppose

Over 65 = 32% Support & 55% Oppose

Young America has swung sharply against Obama and the Democrats. In fact, all of the Democrat's policies are extremely unpopular according to the polls. Obama's approval rating hovering around 50% (and below 50% on many of the polls) is only so high because despite being against his policies, a great many people thinks he's "trying real hard."

Obama may be able to talk the talk, but he can't walk the walk, would be one response - but ultimately, his policies are designed to drop America to its knees, and the people are realizing that.

The question now is if the politicians will listen to public opinion, or try to ram down our throats what we don't want?

The agenda to destroy America is by design, and that is why the elections in 2010 and 2012 are so important. The Democrats have already proven that they don't care what you have to say, or that their plans are unconstitutional. The only way to stop them is to fire them - fire them all.

Conservative candidates need our votes. This is a national effort, and we must be involved. Otherwise, the leftists will do exactly what Obama promised, and change the American Form of Government into something the Founding Fathers never intended.

Friday, November 27, 2009

By Douglas V. GibbsWhen William Penn wrote that "If men will not be governed by God, they then must be governed by tyrants," he was not suggesting that we should be a society led by a theocracy, nor one that turns our backs on God. In spite of the influence of the Holy Bible on the founding documents, the First Amendment proclaimed that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." There are four references to a Creator in the Declaration of Independence, therefore it is clear that the founding fathers recognized that God must not be separated from the affairs of the government. However, they also knew, because of the glaring example of England's state religion, and the King being considered the divine head of the church, that a government establishing a religion to be intricately involved in governmental matters could be dangerous as well. A separation made between God and the government would lead to the people being governed by tyrants, but a state religion set up as a theocracy would lead to the government being tyrannical as well.

The understanding was that our rights are granted by God, and as long as government recognizes that those rights are God-given, and not given by man, liberty remains in force. Once government establishes a policy of separating God from man's rights, and the government acts as the arbitor of those rights, tyranny is sure to follow. In other words, since man's rights are given by his Creator, those rights are inalienable, and can only be taken away by the entity that gave man those rights in the first place. If government separates itself from God, and declares that man's rights are given by man, then the government will act as an agency that is able to also take away those same rights.

Understanding that humanity is suspect to corruption, the Constitution, and the first ten Amendments, were written in such a way as to restrict the power of the government. Through such restrictions, it would disallow men from violating the God-given rights of the citizens. Congress is not to establish a religion, nor pass any law "prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Notice in the U.S. Constitution there are no restrictions on the citizens, but there are restrictions on the activities of the government. Therefore, while Congress cannot make a law establishing a religion, the actions of the citizens, even in the public square, or in an arena that receives public funds, cannot be limited when it comes to their expression of religion.

In the State of Georgia a month ago a school board banned the practice at a high school football game of displaying a Bible verse on banners held by high school football cheerleaders on the playing field. A single parent complained, saying that the banner with the Bible verse on it was in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Of course the complaining parent was technically wrong, for the display of the banner could never be considered an action that was the same as Congress passing a law establishing a religion. Nonetheless, the school board banned all future banners of the sort.

How should Christians respond to such a blatant attempt to prohibit the free exercise of one's religion in the public square? Should the voice of a single person complaining about the display of a Bible verse be louder than the majority?

When fighting the war that is being waged against Christianity, often a legal angle is not allowed to the Christian community. The Humanists have convinced society that the idea of Separation of Church and State is a constitutional idea, when indeed it is not. Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists did not establish such a clause, and actually was telling the Baptists (who were the religious minority) in Connecticut that their beef with the Quakers was a local issue, and the federal government could not get involved. As for Jefferson's influence on the U.S. Constitution, one must also remember that Thomas Jefferson wasn't even in the country when the U.S. Constitution was written and ratified. He was in France.

So if society, the judiciary, and government officials have been so misinformed that they believe the complaining person in Georgia that the banners with Bible verses on them were in violation of the Establishment Clause, then how do Christians fight the war being waged against them by secularists that see religion as something that should be limited, and ultimately discarded?

The parents and students in Georgia acted appropriately by refusing to be complacent, and by refusing to allow a single secularist to take away their constitutional right to freely exercise their Christian faith in the public square. What they did was voice their disapproval of the ban by wearing "Warriors for Christ" T-shirts to football games and displaying scores of posters with Bible verses. The elimination of the one banner on the field gave way to numerous banners in the stands, and a rallying of support by the community for the Christian influence the community held so dear.

That is the lesson we all must learn. "United we stand, combined we kick butt" means that we must work together, and fight the war with The Word. The Word of the Spirit, or Scripture, is the sword given to us by Ephesians, Chapter 6, and each of those posters in the football stands with a verse on them were a sword of the spirit that cut into the lies of the opposition.

Our rights are God-given, and government (or school boards) should not be able to remove, or restrict, a citizen's ability to practice one's faith in the public square. Government is now trying to justify killing God with a misinterpretation of the First Amendment, and if they succeed it is nobody's fault but our own for allowing it.

The church must be involved, and our society must be reminded that the principles of this nation were founded on Judeo-Christian values. To step aside and allow government to take away the rights our Lord gave us is cowardly, and unChristian-like. The armor of God from Ephesians 6 gives us a belt of truth, breastplate of righteousness, shoes of peace, shield of faith, helmet of salvation, and sword of the spirit. Notice there is no protection for the back. That is because we are not supposed to turn and run away. We are to face the enemy, and use the armor of God to wage our battles.

So next time you find yourself under attack, remember the Armor of God, and remember what a bunch of parents and students did at a football game in the State of Georgia.

After refusing to participate with the early morning Black Friday festivities, during the late morning my wife and I braved the aftermath and ventured to a few empty-shelved stores. Wearing my Santa Hat, and "Jesus Wept John 11:35" shirt, I carried my nine month old grandson on my shoulders, and greeted everyone I could with the words: "Merry CHRISTmas!"

Rejected clothing and toys were scattered along the floors of some of the sotres. Though a lot of the traffic was still up, it wasn't as bad as earlier in the morning. Apparently the brave ones that fought through the pre-dawn sales were still marching around. Wal-Mart's lot was full, as was the mall's.

K-Mart was the most decerative, showing off "Christmas" more than the other stores we visited. In fact, the Temecula K-Mart had such good deals, we ran into a family member who drove all the way in from Los Angeles County to shop there.

Evidence of the early morning madness was most prevalent in news reports, one of which told of a Wal-Mart in Upland that had to shut down because the pre-dawn shoppers got too rowdy.

I extended a hand with a "Merry Christmas" greeting every chance I got. Consumers usually smiled and returned the gesture with a "Merry Christmas" of their own. Store employees, however, hesitated, as if they wondered whether or not it was okay to say something other than "Happy Holidays."

We decided not to stop by the local Best Buy, holding our own boycott. Best Buy, this year, seems to be leading the charge in the War on Christmas. In Best Buy's Thanksgiving ad, with the opportunity to greet the Christmas Season, they opted to instead offer a "Happy Eid al-Adha."

Muslims welcomed the greeting, happy to overpower Christmas any chance they can get.

Smaller stores, however, happily greeted us with "Merry Christmas," as did many of the shops at the mall. It seems that the larger the corporation, the more susceptible it is to the pressures of political correctness.

Well, despite the War on Christmas we will be seeing more and more of as the month of December approaches, passes, and leads us toward the New Year, one thing you can be sure of: Political Pistachio is not politically correct.

Merry CHRISTmas.

Tonight, by the way, I will be talking about the trend in the United States to move away from saying "Merry Christmas," and how much of the country is opting instead for "Happy Holidays" and "Seasons Greetings," tonight on the Political Pistachio Radio Revolution. Feel free to join us live at 7pm Pacific, or catch the archive later.

The Orlando Sentinel is reporting that golfer Tiger Woods is in serious condition after an automobile accident in Florida. The accident occurred, according to the Florida Highway Patrol, when Tiger Woods pulled out of his driveway in the early morning hours, struck a fire hydrant, and then drove into a tree.

Reports also indicate that Woods' Cadillac Escalade's air bags did not deploy, which is an indication the vehicle was traveling at a speed under 33 mph.

UPDATE: Tiger Woods has been released from the hospital according to CBS Television. Alcohol was not involved, according to the report.

By Douglas V. GibbsTwice. That is all it took. Twice I have stood in the cold in a line of a hundred or more people outside a super bargains store for hours upon hours before it opened with the hopes of fighting and winning against other bargain hungry shoppers for the popular doll, inexpensive computer, or robotic dog of the season. Twice my wife talked me into it, and twice I told her never again after the madness ended. The third time is not a charm. At three o'clock in the morning my wife and daughter are leaving the safety and warmth of our home to fight for Black Friday deals, and lose out on most of them.

My grandson and I will be snug in our beds, smiling because we chose to stay home.

It's called Black Friday for a reason - and those crazy people hoping to save a few bucks can have it.

Thursday, November 26, 2009

Pastor James David Manning of ATLAH Ministries is well known for being opinionated. He has been hammering away at Barack Obama since day one, and has received a lot of criticism for it.

Reverend Manning is also outspoken about biblical truths, and is not shy about ensuring that all people have a chance to hear what he has to say about scripture. One of the tools he has been using to spread the word is You Tube.

One of the complaints of many Americans about Hate Crimes legislation is that it will enable the government to eventually squash free speech, ultimately allowing the government to arrest pastors for daring to speak out against homosexuality.

Freedom vanishes incrementally, and one of the signs that we are moving in a direction of governmental censorship of free speech is when you begin to see that same kind of censorship exist in society.

You Tube just banned Reverend Manning for his criticism of the homosexual lifestyle, because he dared call it what it is - immoral.

First, a ban on You Tube, next a ban by the government.

Speak up, stop the government from quelling dissent against the hard left! Pastor Manning is continuing the fight, and we need to all be involved as well.

The founder of the John Birch Society, Robert Welch, laid down long ago how the enemy will attempt to conquer the United States from within:

. . . induce gradual surrender of American sovereignty (to a global governance led by an organization like the United Nations). . . greatly expanded government spending (like what we are seeing from the Democrats right now). . . higher taxes (the higher taxes are already being proposed). . . unbalanced budget (Obama's spending is unsustainable). . . wild inflation (destruction of dollar with excessive national deficit and pumping fiat money into the system). . . government price controls (Democrats are currently suggesting such). . . government wage controls (in the guise of combating inflation, Democrats are currently pushing wage controls of executives of bailout corporations). . . socialistic controls over every aspect of our economy (health care will open up complete control for them, for in the effort to mandate your health, they will dictate to you your every action and behavior). . . control over every activity of our daily lives (with health care, they will achieve control over every activity by having control over whether or not you receive care, and ultimately if you live or die). . . increase of cost and reach of federal government. . . increase of centralization of power in Washington. . . elimination of state lines (destruction of state sovereignty). . . complete federalization of the educational system. . . pounding into the consciousness of the horror of modern day warfare (so that we reject raising a military to defend ourselves). . . appeasement of our enemies (which has resulted in an infiltration of our military by the enemy as evidenced by the Fort Hood shooting). . .

America has prospered because of our liberty, free market, and willingness to defend this nation. We have done so "to the incredible advantage of ourselves and everybody else, everybody, that is, except a numerically small clique of power-lusting conspirators who have somehow infected themselves on our gullible world."

We need to, according to Welch:

Restore the complete independence of the United States (includes getting the United States out of the United Nations, and the United Nations out of the United States), Return to Gold-Backed Currency, Reduce size of federal government (eliminate bureauocracies) by fifty percent, recall all American Troops around the world except where necessary to protect American interests (and allowed by Congress, and must be done gradually), get government out of areas where the federal government is not granted authority by the U.S. Constitution (gradually accomplished), we must be active in ridding our nation of the scourge of communism (socialism).

Welch proclaimed these points in 1958, and again in 1974.

One thing is for sure, he did not foresee the rise of the Islamist Jihad. Now, we have weakened ourselves by not following the advice of persons like Mr. Welch, and as a result, we are fighting a two-front war against Islam, and the internal takeover of America by radical Marxists (Obama and the hard left Congressional Democrats).

The freedoms we hold dear are worth fighting for. Thanksgiving is not only an opportunity to thank God for our blessings, but to take a renewed vow to protect them.

The implanted chip will carry all of your information, be scannable, will be tracked by government, and will be eventually required of all people on the globe. . . Remember, biblical propecy indicates that without the Mark of the Beast you will be unable to buy or sell.

Rev.13:16 "And he causes all, both great and small, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark." It says "the hand of them, the right one or upon the forehead of them" in the Greek. The bible often uses the word hand for anything from the forearm to the fingers.

As I have said numerous times on Political Pistachio, and on my Political Pistachio Radio Revolution: Islam is a political ideology masked as a religion. Islam is an ideology more dangerous than Nazism, and in fact was aligned with Hitler. Peaceful Muslims are peaceful despite Islam, not because of it. However, if a worldwide caliphate were to take control of the globe, there would be no moderate Muslims. They would all be rejoicing together at the beheading of infidels. The ideology is patient, with the goal of eventual complete control of the globe. From a Christian point of view, studying Quranic and Biblical prophecy, it is clear that Allah is Satan, the Mahdi is the anti-Christ, and Jesus is their anti-Christ. The Islamic Jihad is the tool of deception, and none other than Lucifer's army. Islam will not stop until they dominate the Earth, or are destroyed in the process, and they are using our unwillingness to identify the enemy (due to political correctness) to gain footing, and concessions. The enemy has risen, and we are unwilling to fight them. Such will be the key to our destruction if we do not throw out the appeasers and weak traitors (Obama and his gang of Democrat idiots) that are in current control of the U.S. Government.

Below is a heart-wrenching video offered by a reader of Political Pistachio in the comments section. Debbie is the mother of an American Hero who is a member of the 5th Stryker Brigade 1-17 ID fighting in Afghanistan.

In the video she offers to Mr. Obama: "While you ponder on whether to support our troops, our men and women are dying and losing limbs in Afghanistan. . . They are not political pawns, they are real men and women and you should be ashamed of yourself. . . [to the troops] We have not forgotten you."

We are praying for our brothers and sisters of the U.S. Armed Forces, and we are praying that Obama decides to give them the equipment and personnel these troops so desperately need.

An Email to me recently asked this question: What would we think of a Fire Chief that stood outside a burning building, watching his firemen die in the fire, while pondering whether or not to send in more firefighters and hoses? The choice is obvious. Either get additional men and equipment into the building to extinguish the fire, or pull the firefighters in there out before they are consumed by the flames. Hesitating through indecision only places the firefighters in mortal danger as they fight a fight that is insurmountable without enough personnel, equipment, and supplies.

By Douglas V. GibbsThanksgiving each year becomes more and more challenging. It used to be an amazing feat for mom to get dad, and all three of us kids, at the table at the same time without somebody hitting somebody, and without somebody in tears. Now, with each of us kids married and with children (and in my case grandchildren as well), getting the family together is a major endeavor that includes picking a time that does not interfere with all of the other family dinners.

My brother visits his in-laws around 11am, and my sister's in-laws are having their Thanksgiving Dinner at about 6pm. My in-laws chose a time in between, just as my folks did. This year we chose to go to my family's meal.

Among all of the chaos, torture, and lunacy is the real reason for Thanksgiving. Sure, turkey sandwiches for a week, and a family get-together that rivals anything Hollywood can produce when it comes to the insanity, is great - but it's not the reason for Thanksgiving.

Thanksgiving is the opportunity as a nation to stop for one day and thank the Lord for the blessings we have received. The original intention was to give thanks to God for the blessings the colonies were receiving. After all, their beginning was a rough one. But the lessons from the Indians regarding farming, and the lessons of a free market over a more communal society, gave the early settlers plenty to be thankful for.

On this Thanksgiving I ask that we all recognize that we live in a free nation founded on the principles of God-given values. We have prospered, despite the challenges we are facing right now. Our poorest citizens live better than 90% of the world's population. We have much to be thankful for, and it is to God we must give the glory.

Tonight I got the rare treat of listening to, and calling into, Loki's Halls of Valhalla Blog Talk Radio Show. The U.S. Constitution is the typical topic of the program, though Loki spent a lot of time discussing Thanksgiving, the historical beginnings, and the significance of the holiday. Then, about half way through the show, music was brought up, and the remainder of the program seemed to be a trip down memory lane.

Music played a large part in my life as I grew up, and it still does. If someone asks me my favorite band of all time, I quickly respond "Pink Floyd." Led Zeppelin is a close number two. The Dark Side of the Moon by Pink Floyd is probably the greatest album to be ever put out, and The Wall is the greatest movie.

But as I look back, Pink Floyd's influence has a very specific place in my life. The Wall brought me to the place where I truly reflected on my relationship with my biological father. The music is my "groove" tunes, where I just put in the CD and vegetate.

My earliest memories of music, outside of the hymns in church, played through the speakers of my father's Toyota Corona sedan, on his 8-Track Tape Player. The Doors, Jackson Brown, and Super Tramp were early favorites. As my own musical identity evolved, I leaned more towards the Acid Rock of the day, along with a few other bands that were closely related. My earliest favorites were The Who, Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd. I liked KISS only because I knew it drove my mom nuts. Through the years I began to truly enjoy Jethro Tull, Black Sabbath (with Ozzie as front man, not Ronnie James Dio - Black Sabbath, aside from Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin, is probably one of the greatest bands ever to grace this Earth), Aerosmith, and Bad Company.

When the punk rock scene emerged, I jumped head-first into the genre. My folks were rather strict, however, so I actually had two sets of clothes for a while. I wore one set to school, and home from school, but wore an entirely different set of clothing at school. Ripped jeans, button down shirts, and buttons with The Sex Pistols, Dead Kennedys, Black Flag, TSOL, The Circle Jerks, The Cramps, The Clash, and a number of others adorned my shirt or jacket. The hair got messed up, and the attitude was of pure rebellion. Then, when the school bell rang, I ran to the gym locker room, changed back into my parent's-friendly clothes, fixed my hair, and rode the bus home.

By the time I reached high school, the punk phase was over. As a sophomore I dressed preppie, but listened to Metal, and the New Wave that was more influenced by Punk. Metallica, Van Halen, Megadeth, Foreigner, Cheap Trick, Queen, Adam and the Ants, The Cars, Blue Oyster Cult, Kansas, Judas Priest, AC-DC, The Police, Oingo Boingo, Tom Petty, Ozzie, Nazareth, Rush, Boston, and Styx all influenced me greatly.

In the Navy, I continued with my love of Heavy Metal, but I also began to listen to a lot of seventies rock again too, re-introducing myself to Credence Clearwater Revival, Free, Lynard Skynard, The Stones (Painted Black is my favorite of theirs), and so on.

As I approached thirty, however, my taste began to change, and some friends convinced me to visit a Country-Western bar. As time passed, the music caught my interest, and the mid-90s honky tonk scene became a part of my musical evolution. Garth Brooks and Chris LeDoux seemed to be the ones I listened to the most. Eventually, the roping and riding bulls became hard on the body. I hung on to the country music of that era, but I haven't really followed the music trends of country-western since.

When my cousin, Jonathon Davis, erupted on the music scene with KORN, I paid attention to the industry once again. Some of KORN's music I really like, but Linkin' Park is the band that I liked the most from that burst of new music. However, at the time my primary interest was in, and still is in, Christian Rock - primarily of the sort you hear on Air1. Jeremy Camp, Casting Crowns, and Kutless rank as my favorites when I first became a fan of Christian Rock.

Anyway, I know I didn't really go into the reasons all of this music was important to me, but I am sure I will go into Pink Floyd's importance in the near future. It's just that music has been an important part in my growth as a person, good and bad. However, if you want to get a good idea of how I was as a kid, the movie Detroit Rock City comes pretty close, right down to the mom saying that KISS stands for Knights In Satan's Service - except in my case my mom inserted "Kings" in the place of "Knights."

Whereas the average person complains approximately 15 to 30 times per day, resulting in roughly 4,500,000,000 complaints spoken every day in the United States;

Whereas complaining keeps people focused on current problems stultifying their innate abilities to seek and create positive, harmonious solutions;

Whereas complaining has been shown by research psychologists to be detrimental to a person's physical and emotional health, relationships, and to limit their career success;

Whereas the `A Complaint Free World' organization is to be recognized for its efforts to encourage people to redirect their minds toward more positive, constructive, and rewarding lives and for its goal to positively inspire at least 1 percent of the global population (60 million people) to become complaint free;

Whereas thousands of people across the United States, including many students, have already adopted the complaint free attitude; and

Whereas `Complaint Free Wednesday' will be observed on the day before Thanksgiving, providing each person in the United States a day free from complaining in order to prepare for a day of gratitude: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That Congress--

(1) supports the goals and ideals of Complaint Free Wednesday;

(2) encourages each person in the United States to remember that having a positive life begins with having a positive attitude; and

(3) recognizes and reaffirms the meaning of Thanksgiving by asking each person in the United States to use `Complaint Free Wednesday' to refrain from complaining and prepare for a day of gratitude.

----------------

Yeah, people complain too much, but that is their right. Screw you, government, for telling me I complain too much. Quit trying to change us into a socialist nation and maybe I won't complain so much. And who gives you the right to tell me not to complain. And I wonder what your definition of a complaint truly is. Is your goal to shut up dissent? If I dare oppose your policies, will I be seen as complaining?

As for Thanksgiving: it is not a day of gratitude, it is a day of giving thanks to our Lord for the blessings we have received. Yes, yes, I know, you get all hung up on that Separation of Church and State thing. Good thing the Founding Fathers did not agree with you regarding the First Amendment.

Below, to help you understand (if that is possible for ignorant liberals), is George Washington's Proclamation that launched the first Thanksgiving:

WHEREAS it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me "to recommend to the people of the United States a DAY OF PUBLICK THANKSGIVING and PRAYER, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:"

NOW THEREFORE, I do recommend and assign THURSDAY, the TWENTY-SIXTH DAY of NOVEMBER next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed;-- for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish Constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted;-- for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge;-- and, in general, for all the great and various favours which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also, that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions;-- to enable us all, whether in publick or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us); and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

GIVEN under my hand, at the city of New-York, the third day of October, in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-nine.

(signed) G. Washington

-----

Source: The Massachusetts Centinel, Wednesday, October 14, 1789

-----

Hmmm, sounds like George Washington is guilty of breaking your liberal Separation of Church and State thing - maybe because your idea of the First Amendment is in error!

Think about the text of this speech while you are chowing down on your turkey dinner tomorrow.

...

Fair Use

~FAIR USE~ Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site/blog for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

However, if you still believe your copyright has been violated, we accept notifications of alleged copyright violations in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Note that if you materially misrepresent a claim of copyright infringement you will be liable for damages (including costsand attorney fees). We require the following information in order to respond to your request: Describe in detail the copyrighted work that you believe has been infringed upon (for example, “The copyrighted work is the code that appearson http://www.example.com/thecode.html") Identify the material that you claim is infringing the copyrighted work listed in #1. Include relevant URL’s that will allow us to identify the work. Your address, telephone number,and email address. Include the following statement “I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described above as allegedly infringing is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.” Include thefollowing statement “I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.” Sign the notification, type your full name, sign it electronicallyif submitted via email. Send the notification to douglasvgibbs@yahoo.com. Please place in the subject line Political Pistachio Copyright Infringement.

You can also Email me to bitch and complain if you so desire, as well. In the event that you are offended by my site please advise me of the offensive material by Email, and I will promptly print the Email, and then place it in my shredder to serve as kindling for my fireplace.